From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8337ABC57 for ; Tue, 25 May 2010 22:10:49 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: An4EAO/L+0vV+668gWdsb2JhbACSDIwgAQEWIiLBK4UTBINC X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,299,1272837600"; d="scan'208";a="63412886" Received: from rastageeks.org (HELO mail.rastageeks.org) ([213.251.174.188]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 25 May 2010 22:10:49 +0200 Received: from leonard.localnet (unknown [129.81.170.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.rastageeks.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9B62A2DB39 for ; Tue, 25 May 2010 22:14:35 +0200 (CEST) From: Romain Beauxis To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Bigarrays and blocking_section.. Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 15:11:41 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.30-2-amd64; KDE/4.4.3; x86_64; ; ) References: <201005251125.21755.toots@rastageeks.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201005251511.41565.toots@rastageeks.org> X-Spam: no; 0.00; bigarrays:01 bigarray:01 struct:01 buffer:01 segfaults:01 28,:98 caml-list:01 caml:02 caml:02 blocking:04 size:95 size:95 correctly:04 problem:05 problem:05 Hi ! Le mardi 25 mai 2010 14:29:28, vous avez =E9crit : > Are you sure that you correctly calculate the bigarray size in your > Caml code? Why not just use struct caml_ba_array fields? I suspect > it's not GC problem but just a buffer overrun in memset(). I'm pretty sure the size is not the problem. There may be another origin fo= r=20 the segfaults, though, but I would like to know if my assumption that I can= =20 release the global lock under the mentioned condition is correct.. Romain